Kathryn Hume's other Pynchon stuff

[Markekohut]

I will repeat that AtD is as rich as it gets. More in it because it is the longest. A long lifetime's vision. but we know my fanboy status re it.

whether some, much, is "formulaic" one meaning of which might be not as aesthetically interesting---told not shown; thematically repetitious, sentimental in parts.---is surely true given the huge ambitious attempt it is, yet too aesthetically abstract for me. (by that I mean even if true 
The weaknesses seem very minor to me.)

I would rather read and reread AtD, if intellectual pleasure is most wanted in literature than
Almost any new book or even most modern classics--GR is an exception of course. 

Again, nothing new here but since we 're going on the record again.





Sent from my iPad

On Sep 12, 2012, at 9:34 AM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:

> I believe you re mostly correct in these statements.  Pynchon can
> still write beautiful and elaborate prose (but I think he's less
> likely to make page-length sentences as in GR).  But I got the
> distinct feeling in AtD that it was in the service of not much.  It
> almost felt at times that he was imitating himself or following a
> formula.
> 
> David Morris
> 
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 5:11 AM, alice wellintown
> <alicewellintown at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> So, I suspect that it is not the prose style,
>> surely superior in the elder P of AGTD, that turns GR-Fanboys off. It
>> is other things, like characters and themes and settings and, dare I
>> say, plots. But it is not the style, not the words and sentences and
>> imagery and the craft. No way! AGTD is superior hand at work. No
>> serious reader or writer can deny that.